This isn't about how much fun the multiplayer is or isn't. This is about the fact that it is set up in such a way that encourages people to play it to change the outcome of the game in one way or another. Of all the possible things I can think of for their reasoning behind this decision it all comes back to trying to get players to give them more money through the multiplayer store and not to make the game better. I can promise you that they will make more money with this setup than they would had they decided to make single player completely independent of multiplayer. It's a deceitful tactic that is designed to make people think it's their idea to pay for in-game items when really the idea has been put there through suggestive influence and they are hoping that subliminal knowledge of the implications of not buying them will get people to pay. This might be a stretch but it's like these fake trial antivirus programs that show the user a false list of infections and then show a link to a website where they can buy the program to fix them. It's something I expect from a con artist not a game developer.
The difference between requiring multiplayer or doing more fetch quests and planet scanning is that multiplayer does absolutely nothing to expand or advance the story or lore of the universe they've created in the series. Every planet you can scan has a bit of information and history about it and the fetch quests (however tedious they may be) tells a little more about the backstory. Multiplayer is simply run around and kill all the bad guys until they're dead. I can do that already in the main game AND progress the story at the same time.
How much of this do we blame on Bioware and how much of this do we blame on EA? EA has a history of trying to milk as much money out of there products as they can. (See SIMS)
But Bioware for three games now, 3.5 if you want to include DLC for ME2, of practically forcing us to purchase additional content; or at the very least strongly promoting it DA:O. Could EA have influenced this or is Bioware actively doing it?
I finally have money to buy the game, however, seeing so many complaints, not just here but on other sites as well, I will wait until Bioware "fixes" some of these issues.
Thanks Bioware, for saving me some money that will be better spent on other things at this time.
I am so proud of Winfrey's proudness of Rexxar's burgeoning mastery of discourse and debate. Mrs. Preacher deserves all the credit. Icrontian kids grow up so fast...
If your argument is that multiplayer is not needed for rainbows and glitter the reason for that is there is no rainbow and glitter ending. I've learned since writing this that the ending is less dependent on multiplayer than I originally thought (and that's a whole different shitstorm altogether). That doesn't change my argument that the ending should not be affected in any way by what you do in multiplayer which it is. It does have an impact on single player even if it's small and it is all done to try to set up way to get continuous income from players after the initial purchase which is garbage for a game like this. More proof of this is the fact that your readiness rating goes down every day that you don't play it thus encouraging people to continue playing it indefinitely to keep their rating up.
That kind of business model is better suited for MMOs which rely on a monthly fee and should not be carried over to stand alone single player games. Going along with this gives them reason to see how far they can push it and I wouldn't be surprised to see it eventually lead to subscription fees to play a single player game. If you do that you are likely to get half finished games which are released for full price that charge a monthly fee plus micro-transactions for in game items and DLC.
This has the potential to lead to a day where developers aren't selling games, they're selling programs designed to form an addiction in customers who then grind money for them and call it a game. This exact thing is already a possibility with Diablo 3's upcoming real money auction house. While it looks like Blizzard is setting it up in a way that prevents them from abusing the system (for now) there are people who will want to exploit it and systems like it. Mass Effect 3's multiplayer is just another early form of this eventual outcome.
Are you sure that's EMS and not Total? I have done ever single mission and side quest in the game, and I'm very close to the end. I'm sitting at 3773 EMS, but over 6000 total. I've managed 57% readiness at the moment.
I don't get it. I've done everything in the game and I couldn't achieve 4000. Multiplayer only effects the readiness percentage, right? The MP doesn't boost the EMS.
Your EMS equals your total, divided by your readiness score. If you play a shitload of online play, your readiness will eventually hit 100%, bringing your EMS up to equal your total (6k).
I don't get it. I've done everything in the game and I couldn't achieve 4000. Multiplayer only effects the readiness percentage, right? The MP doesn't boost the EMS.
Military Strength is ALSO effected by decisions made in ME1 and ME2
For Example: Did you let the council die in ME1? If you did, your Alliance Military Strength would be higher in ME3
So then it is impossible to the the sparkle rainbow ending without MP. You can't push your EMS up high enough with an imported character, full reputation and all quests in SP complete.
This is dumb. I'm at the end of the game, but I'm going to re-load so I can ensure the sparkle rainbow ending.
Comments
The difference between requiring multiplayer or doing more fetch quests and planet scanning is that multiplayer does absolutely nothing to expand or advance the story or lore of the universe they've created in the series. Every planet you can scan has a bit of information and history about it and the fetch quests (however tedious they may be) tells a little more about the backstory. Multiplayer is simply run around and kill all the bad guys until they're dead. I can do that already in the main game AND progress the story at the same time.
But Bioware for three games now, 3.5 if you want to include DLC for ME2, of practically forcing us to purchase additional content; or at the very least strongly promoting it DA:O. Could EA have influenced this or is Bioware actively doing it?
Thanks Bioware, for saving me some money that will be better spent on other things at this time.
Casey Hudson speaks. pretty spoiler free and doesn't really say anything we didn't know'
DLC DLC DLC
<100% Reputation you will need 5000 EMS, which will require MP.
You will *MOST LIKELY* need to import from ME2 to get 100% Reputation.
anyways, DO NOT NEED MP for rainbows and glitter. article, false.
That kind of business model is better suited for MMOs which rely on a monthly fee and should not be carried over to stand alone single player games. Going along with this gives them reason to see how far they can push it and I wouldn't be surprised to see it eventually lead to subscription fees to play a single player game. If you do that you are likely to get half finished games which are released for full price that charge a monthly fee plus micro-transactions for in game items and DLC.
This has the potential to lead to a day where developers aren't selling games, they're selling programs designed to form an addiction in customers who then grind money for them and call it a game. This exact thing is already a possibility with Diablo 3's upcoming real money auction house. While it looks like Blizzard is setting it up in a way that prevents them from abusing the system (for now) there are people who will want to exploit it and systems like it. Mass Effect 3's multiplayer is just another early form of this eventual outcome.
Or maybe I'm just going insane.
For Example: Did you let the council die in ME1? If you did, your Alliance Military Strength would be higher in ME3
So then it is impossible to the the sparkle rainbow ending without MP. You can't push your EMS up high enough with an imported character, full reputation and all quests in SP complete.
This is dumb. I'm at the end of the game, but I'm going to re-load so I can ensure the sparkle rainbow ending.
80 hours vs 2 hours of MP for 10% Readiness, your choice.
I spent 5 hours playing MP and got my readiness to ~80%. I also enjoyed those 5 hours